※ 引述《gaoba (gaoba)》之铭言： : 关於引用国外OA内容 : 刚好前阵子处理一个马来西亚申请案的OA，内容很短，就贴上来给大家参考吧 : Your corresponding United States patent no. US X,XXX,XXX B2 has been : granted with claims which are narrower in scope than the present claims : of your Malaysian application, and certain prior art listed on the patent : was considered relevant during prosecution. It therefore appears, prima : facie, that your present claims are not novel and/or inventive as : required by sections 14 and 15 having regard to that prior art and/or do : not clearly define the invention in terms of the technical features as : required by [Reg. 13(1) and 13(5)]. : 完全不抄US OA，没有别的理由，就是叫你照着修 : 这样算不算有失国格？ 要不要写信给马来西亚的专利局局长干谯一下？ : 还是申复：请问马来西亚是美国的一州吗 : ps.拜托不要战国家 就事论事 战人不战国家 prima facie这一段的意思就是指 表面上看起来美国专利会准许是因为申请人将claim范围改小 因此举证的责任由马来西亚审查委员移到申请人这边 并不代表要求claim修到一样 要注意的是 1. 这个发出的文件没列出前案和审查理由 (这点我个人很不能接受) 2. 後面引用的条文是马来西亚的条文 (这点似乎比某些人强 要人家照修claim连条文都没写) 不过马来西亚这份文件也并没有很肯定的说是以哪一条核驳 很显然连美国申请案审查历史都没有看 他只是看最後issue的专利来决定claim范围表面上看起来不同 要求申请人说明或修改 最後的引用条文部分也是以不确定方式写的 "因此看起来, 表面上, 您所申请的claim因为 (美国专利审查过程的)前案而缺乏14和15条要求的新颖性以及/或是发明性, 以及/或是 缺乏Reg. 13(1) and 13(5) 要求的明确定义发明技术特徵" 我是有点怀疑马来西亚可以核准专利的claim不同作为核驳理由 (而且还是prima facie case) 以下是我查的马来西亚专利法 我也很想请问台湾有马来西亚下面这种法源依据吗? http://www.myipo.gov.my/acts/Patents.pdf Section 14. Novelty. (1) An invention is new if it is not anticipated by prior art. (2) Prior art shall consist of-- (a) everything disclosed to the public, anywhere in the world, by written publication, by oral disclosure, by use or in any other way, prior to the priority date of the patent application claiming the invention; [Am. Act A648: s.8; Am. Act A863: s.6] (b) the contents of a domestic patent application having an earlier priority date than the patent application referred to in paragraph (a) to the extent that such contents are included in the patent granted on the basis of the said domestic patent application. [Am. Act A648: s.8; Am. Act A863: s.6] 马来西亚是比绝对新颖性更严的国家 14(2)(b)写到的是就算你在马来西亚先申请 但是只要有一篇马来西亚专利申请案的优先权日比你最早申请日或优先权日还早 就可以当前案 (台湾拟制新颖性可不是用国内申请前案的优先权日来当前案代表日比对) 更正: 上面是错误的 台湾专利法只有写申请在先而在後公开: 第二十三条　申请专利之发明，与申请在先而在其申请後始公开或公告之发明或新型专利 申请案所附说明书或图式载明之内容相同者，不得取得发明专利。但其申请人与申请在先 之发明或新型专利申请案之申请人相同者，不在此限。 但是审查基准是以优先权日作前案申请日来判断, 前提跟马来西亚一样是前案要在国内申请 审查基准第三章　专利要件 2.7.2引证文件 审查拟制丧失新颖性时，引证文件必须为申请在先而在後申请案申请日之後始公开或公告 之发明或新型先申请案。认定先申请案是否得作为引证文件的有关事项如下： ... (2)先申请案之申请日（主张优先权者为优先权日）必须早於後申请案之申请日（主张优 先权者为优先权日），且应在该後申请案申请日之後公开或公告。先申请案於审查当时尚 未公开或公告者，不得作为引证文件。 ... (4)先申请案主张国际优先权或国内优先权者，对於已揭露於优先权基础案及先申请案说 明书全文中之发明或新型，认定申请先、後的时点应为该先申请案之优先权日；对於仅揭 露於先申请案说明书全文但未揭露於优先权基础案之发明或新型，认定申请先、後的时点 应为该先申请案之申请日。 (5)先申请案主张国内优先权者，优先权基础案於申请之次日起满十五个月视为撤回，对 於仅揭露於优先权基础案但未揭露於先申请案之发明或新型，由於该发明或新型并未经公 告或公开，故不得作为审查拟制丧失新颖性之引证文件。 Section 29A. Request for substantive examination or modified substantive examination. 申请实审 (1) If an application for a patent has been examined under section 29 and is not withdrawn or refused, the applicant shall file, within the prescribed period, a request for a substantive examination of the application. 如果通过section 29的初步审查 申请人应在规定的期限内提出要求实审 (2) If a patent or other title of industrial property protection has been granted to the applicant or his predecessor in title in a prescribed country outside Malaysia or under a prescribed treaty or Convention for an invention which is the same or essentially the same as the invention claimed in the application, the applicant may, instead of requesting for a substantive examination, request for a modified substantive examination. 如果申请人在规定的国家已申请相同发明的专利获准 可以提出简化实审 (3) A request for a substantive examination or a modified substantive examination shall be made in the prescribed form and shall not be deemed to have been filed until the prescribed fee has been paid to the Registrar and any other prescribed requirement has been complied with. 申请实审或简化实审要依规定格式申请缴费 (4) The Registrar may require the applicant to provide, at the time of filing a request for a substantive examination - (a) any prescribed information or prescribed supporting document concerning the filing of any application for a patent or other title of industrial property protection filed outside Malaysia by such applicant or his predecessor in title with a national, regional or international industrial property office; (b) any prescribed information concerning the results of any search or examination carried out by an International Searching Authority under the Patent Cooperation Treaty, relating to the same or essentially the same invention as that claimed in the application for which the request for a substantive examination is being filed. 登记官可以要求申请人在请求实审时提供 a.有关申请人在马来西亚国外申请的任何专利保护的任何规定资讯或辅助文件 b.有关任何签订PCT的国际检索单位, 所作出对与该马来西亚申请实审案相同的发明 的检索或是审查结果, (5) If the applicant - (a) fails to file either a request under subsection (1) for a substantive examination or a request under subsection (2) for a modified substantive examination; or (b) fails to provide the information or document referred to in subsection (4) as required by the Registrar, within the prescribed period, the application for a patent shall, subject to subsection (6), be deemed to be withdrawn at the end of that period. 没有提交请求实审或简化实审, 或是没有提交上一段登记官可以要求提供的文件 超过规定时间後, 申请案会被视为放弃 (6) Notwithstanding subsection (5), the Registrar may, upon the request of the applicant, grant a deferment of the filing of a request for examination referred to in subsection (1) or (2) or a deferment of the provision of the information or document referred to in subsection (4), and such deferment may be granted only on the grounds that - (a) the patent or title referred to in subsection (2) has not been granted or is not available; or (b) the information or document referred to in subsection (4) would not be available, by the expiration of the prescribed period for the filing of a request under subsection (1) or (2). 在以下情况下, 申请人可以向登记官提出延期申请实审, 避免超过规定期间没有提出申请实审 a. 申请人在国外申请的专利没过 所以不能提简化实审 b. 在申请实审规定期间到期时, 国外检索单位的检索或审查结果还无法取得 马来西亚专利规定 http://www.myipo.gov.my/acts/Patent%20Regulations%201986.pdf Regulation 27C. Substantive examination. 实审 ... (2) For the purpose of determining whether the application complies with the substantive requirements, in particular sections 14 and 15 of the Act, the Examiner shall search such documents as the Registrar deems necessary. (3) Upon receipt of the Examiner's report under section 30(1) (b) of the Act, the Registrar may request the Examiner to conduct a further search or other investigation to determine whether the requirements of sections 14 and 15 of the Ad have been satisfied and subregulation (2) shall apply in relation to such further search or other investigation. (4) Where section 30 (3) of the Act applies, the Registrar shall send a copy of the Examiner's report to the applicant and the applicant shall make any observation on such report or any amendment to the application or both within three months from the date of mailing of the report. (5) Where the applicant makes any observation on the Examiner's report or any amendment to the application or both within the prescribed period, the Registrar shall refer them to the Examiner who shall report his determination to the Registrar. 2. 为了决定申请案是否符合可专利要件, 审查官要寻找登记官认为需要的文件 3. 收到审查官的报告後, 登记官可以要求审查官进行进一步的搜寻或是调查, 决定 专利要件是否被满足 4. 当收到审查官的报告时, 申请人应在三个月内表示对报告的意见或是提出修正 5. 当申请人做出意见或修正, 登记官应通知审查官, 审查官应报告其决定 Regulation 27D. Modified substantive examination. 简化实审 (原文这边examination写成exaggeration, 法规公告文都能错字让我有点傻眼) ... (2) In addition, it shall also be a substantive requirement that the description, claims and drawings of the invention claimed in the application, whether as filed or as amended under the Act or these Regulations, apart from matters of form, shall be the same or substantially the same as the description, claims and drawings of the invention granted a patent or other title of industrial property protection by the prescribed country or under the prescribed treaty or Convention. ....(後面3, 4, 5, 6条同27C 实审 2, 3, 4, 5条) 简化实审的实质要件还另外包括申请案请求发明的说明书, claim, 图示 要与同发明被核准的国外专利案的说明书, claim, 图示相同或实质相同 如果你提出的是简化实审 马来西亚官方是有权要求claim, 说明书, 图示修成一样的 法源依据就是马来西亚专利法(Patent Act) section 29 另外以下纯属个人看法 如果TIPO会有人因为这样的通知就认为把claim修到跟美国一样是世界潮流 而无视法源/法规/立法精神上的不同 我也只能体会原来是这样的人在等着copy美国OA (连参考或抄都算不上 反正连花点时间去看懂都没有嘛) 还真怀疑他们是否能从中/英文的claim加上各国专利法规上的差异 去识别claim scope相不相同 还有讲实在点台湾人在自己家里先申请的专利 还要因为审查委员在等国外先审好才有动作 外国人比较晚在美国申请专利 却因为美国审比较快先准了 还可以在台湾引用国外优先权 拿美国审查结果先比台湾人拿到专利 国内老是干这种事是要谈甚麽科技竞争力 -- 任何科技的进步都有危险性, 火刚出现时也很危险,语言能力甚至更可怕。 直到今日, 上述两者依旧不安全, 但人若没了它们就不能为人。 -艾西莫夫 --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 118.167.203.82 谢谢e兄指教, 之前我以为和美国一样 http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/2100_2136_03.htm Reference's Foreign Priority Date Under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) and (f) Cannot Be Used as the 35 U.S.C. 102(e) Reference Date ※ 编辑: colinh 来自: 118.167.203.82 (08/12 01:44)